Even evidence-based instructional methods may not be sufficient for closing achievement gaps. If teachers are not maximizing instructional time, achievement gaps are likely to widen over time; therefore, instruction need not only be effective but efficient as well. The purposes of this article are to (a) provide practitioners with a broad definition of instructional efficiency and (b) describe several considerations for increasing efficiency in the classroom. Suggestions are made for planning, delivering, and evaluating instruction.
BurnsM.BoiceC. (2009). Comparison of the relationship between words retained and intelligence for three instructional strategies among students with below-average IQ. School Psychology Review, 38(2), 284–292.
2.
BurnsM.Sterling-TurnerH. (2010). Comparison of efficiency measures for academic interventions based on acquisition and maintenance. Psychology in the Schools, 47(2), 126–134.
3.
CarnineD. W.SilbertJ.Kame’enuiE. J.TarverS. G.JungjohannK. (2006). Teaching struggling and at-risk readers: A direct instruction approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
4.
DalyE. J.WittJ. C.MartensB. K.DoolE. J. (1997). A model for conducting a functional analysis of academic performance problems. School Psychology Review, 26, 554–574.
5.
DeVriesR.ZanB. (2003). When children make rules. Educational Leadership, 61(1), 64–67.
6.
DowningJ. E.Peckham-HardinK. D. (2001). Daily schedules: A helpful learning tool. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 33(3), 62–68.
7.
ElbaumB. E.VaughnS.HughesM. T.MoodyS. W.SchummJ. S. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at-risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal or Educational Psychology, 92, 399–415.
8.
EllisE. S.WorthingtonL. A.LarkinM. J. (1994). Executive summary of the research synthesis on effective teaching principles and the design of quality tools for educators. Eugene: University of Oregon, National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators.
9.
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.
10.
HelfS.CookeN. L.FlowersC. P. (2009). Effects of two grouping conditions on students who are at risk for reading failure. Preventing School Failure, 53(2), 113–128.
11.
HewardW. L. (1994). Three “low-tech” strategies for increasing the frequency of active student response during group instruction. In GardnerR.SainatoD. M.CooperJ. O.HeronT. E.HewardW. L.EshlemanJ.GrossiT. A. (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction (pp. 283–320). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
12.
HewardW. L. (2003). Ten faulty notions about teaching and learning that hinder the effectiveness of special education. Journal of Special Education, 36, 186–205.
13.
HewardW. L. (2009). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
14.
Kame’enuiE. J.CarnineD. (1998). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15.
Kame’enuiE. J.SimmonsD. C. (1999). Toward successful inclusion of students with disabilities: The architecture of instruction. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
16.
KlubnikC.ArdoinS. P. (2010) Examining immediate and maintenance effects of a reading intervention package on generalization materials: Individual versus group implementation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19, 9–29.
17.
KonradM.FowlerC. H.WalkerA. R.TestD. W.WoodW. M. (2007). Effects of self-determination interventions on academic skills of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 89–113.
18.
KonradM.HesslerT. (2010). Introduction to special education: What’s the big idea?Unpublished manuscript.
19.
KonradM.JosephL. M.EveleighE. (2009). A meta-analytic review of guided notes. Education and Treatment of Children, 32, 421–444.
20.
KonradM.JosephL. M.ItoiM. (2011). Using guided notes to enhance instruction for all students. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46, 131–140.
21.
MarzanoR. J. (2003). What works in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
22.
McCurdyM.DalyE.GortmakerV.BonfiglioC.PersampieriM. (2007). Use of brief instructional trials to identify small group reading strategies: A two experiment study. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 7–26.
23.
NewmanL. (July2006). Facts from NLTS2: General education participation and academic performance of students with learning disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from www.nlts2.org/fact_sheets/nlts2_fact_sheet_2006_07.pdf
24.
NewmanL.WagnerM.CametoR.KnokeyA.-M. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school. A report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2009-3017). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
25.
NistL.JosephL. M. (2008). Effectiveness and efficiency of flashcard drill instructional methods on urban first-graders’ word recognition, acquisition maintenance, and generalization. School Psychology Review, 37, 294–308.
26.
PetursdottirA.McMasterK.McComasJ.BradfieldT.BraganzaV.Koch-McDonaldJ.. . . ScharfH. (2009). Brief experimental analysis of early reading interventions. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 215–243.
27.
PlantyM.HussarW.SnyderT.KenaG.KewalRamaniA.KempJ.. . . DinkesR. (2009). The condition of education 2009 (NCES 2009-081). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
28.
PlantyM.HussarW.SnyderT.ProvasnikS.KenaG.DinkesR.. . . KempJ. (2008). The condition of education 2008 (NCES 2008-031). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
29.
PollowayE. A.CroninM. E.PattonJ. R. (1986). The efficacy of group versus one-to-one instruction: A review. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 22–30.
30.
PoncyB. C.SkinnerC. H.JaspersK. E. (2007). Evaluating and comparing interventions designed to enhance math fact accuracy and fluency: Cover, copy, and compare versus taped problems. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 27–37.
31.
RampeyB. D.DionG. S.DonahueP. L. (2009). NAEP 2008 Trends in academic progress in reading and mathematics (NCES 2009-479). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
32.
RandolphJ. J. (2007). Meta-analysis of the effects of response cards on student achievement, participation, and intervals of off-task behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9, 113–128.
33.
ReidR.GonzalezJ. E.NordnessP. D.TroutA.EpsteinM. H. (2004). A meta-analysis of the academic status of students with emotional/behavioral disturbance. Journal of Special Education, 38, 130–143.
34.
RohenaE. I.JitendraA. K.BrowderD. M. (2002). Comparison of the effects of Spanish and English constant time delay instruction on sight word reading by Hispanic learners with mental retardation. Journal of Special Education, 36, 169–184.
35.
SheridanS. (2009). Homework interventions for children with attention and learning problems: Where is the “home” in “homework?”School Psychology Review, 38, 334–337.
36.
SimmonsD. C.Kame’enuiE. J.HarnB.CoyneM. D.StoolmillerM.SantoroL. E.. . . KaufmanN. K. (2007). Attributes of effective and efficient kindergarten reading intervention: An examination of instructional time and design specificity. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 331–347.
37.
SkinnerC. H. (2010). Applied comparative researchers must measure learning rates: A commentary on efficiency articles. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 166–172.
38.
SkinnerC. H.BelfioreP. J.MaceH. W.Williams-WilsonS.JohnsG. A. (1997). Altering response topography to increase response efficiency and learning rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 54–64.
39.
SkinnerC. H.BelfioreP. J.WatsonT. S. (1995). Assessing the relative effects of interventions in students with mild disabilities: Assessing instructional time. Assessment in Rehabilitation and Exceptionality, 20, 207–220.
40.
StotzK. E.ItoiM.KonradM.Alber-MorganS. R. (2008). Effects of self-graphing on written expression of fourth grade students with high-incidence disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17, 172–186.
41.
TincaniM.ErnsbargerS. C.HarrisonT. J.HewardW. L. (2005). The effects of fast and slow-paced teaching on participation, accuracy, and off-task behavior of children in the Language for Learning program. Journal of Direct Instruction, 5, 97–109.
42.
ToppinoT. C.CohenM. S.DavisM. L.MoorsA. C. (2009). Metacognitive control over the distribution of practice: When is spacing preferred?Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1352–1358.
43.
WatsonT. S.RayK. P. (1997). The effects of different units of measurement on instructional decision making. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 42–53.
44.
WertsM. G.CaldwellN. K.WoleryM. (2003). Instructive feedback: Effects of a presentation variable. Journal of Special Education, 37, 124–133.
